About if you don't vote for us than the US will have a second devastating attack? Does that meand that if you vote for Kerry, than the Democrats will bomb the white house or what? What is this nonsense?<br><br>

it's all about creating an environment of fear and this was just cheney's attempt to extemporaneously play into that theme. done in very poor taste, but i have no doubt he will have his defenders here. <br><br>"Tribal sovereignty means that, it's sovereign. You're a—you've been given sovereignty, and you're viewed as a sovereign entity. And, therefore, the relationship between the federal government and tribes is one between sovereign entities." dubya 8.6.04

What Cheney was saying is Kerry would fail to go on the offensive against terrorists, which is true. <br><br>Of course, preying on the fears of people [example: class warfare] is something liberals neeever do . . . <br><br><br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>

And in the tradition of "Princess Bride"...he just made us a target by implying that we wouldn't be attacked if they are re-elected. Which we all know is a hollow promise, because that means the terrorists would be dying to prove him wrong. And there's no way either party can guarantee there won't be an attack on US land again. So that means...obviously...he "put the poison HERE." (drinks from flask)<br><br>

What Cheney said yesterday:<br><br>"It's absolutely essential that eight weeks from Wednesday, on Nov. 2, we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we'll get hit again and we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States," Cheney told supporters at a town-hall meeting Tuesday.<br><br>Which is completely consistent with the Republican National Convention and everything that has come out of Cheney's mouth. They have nothing to sell but 9/11 and fear. The only thing Bush has going for him is that he was the sitting President staring off into space when the U.S. was attacked on 9/11.<br><br>Not really sure with what evidence Cheney is using to espouse that Kerry would not attack terrorists. Maybe because he might not invade countries and create them? I suppose that makes sense. How can you kill terrorists if you don't have policies in place that create a bunch of them?<br><br><br><br>luciferase is a four nineteener

Does that mean if the terrorists attack before the election we can make Cheney drink the wine with the Iocain powder?<br><br>Anybody want a peanut?<br><br><br><br>luciferase is a four nineteener

*falls over dead* <br><br>

<blockquote>It's absolutely essential that eight weeks from Wednesday, on Nov. 2, we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we'll get hit again and we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States.</blockquote><br><br>That's Cheney being real about the situation. Bush has always said "we'll take the fight to the enemy instead of them bringing it here." Kerry's position is one of defensiveness, not pre-emption. In a post 9/11 world, I'm glad to see Cheney doff the politically correct bullsh!t and be honest real about the situation. He's right. <br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>

Does that mean if the terrorists attack before the election we can make Cheney drink the wine with the Iocain powder?<br><br>Wouldn't matter. He's built up a tolerance to it.<br><br>

Matt -<br><br>What will this country do when Bush/Cheney are ineligible for re-election? Four years from now it will HAVE to be somebody else...<br><br>